Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Restraining Orders Minors topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee advances bill to let parents seek restraining orders for minors abused by nonhousehold members; passes unanimously
Summary
Lawmakers voted 14–0 to send House Bill 187 to the next stage after testimony from parents, advocates and bill sponsors urging a statutory fix so parents can obtain protective orders on behalf of minors abused by people who are not family or household members.
Representative Mike Belcher, the prime sponsor, told the Children and Family Law Committee on Feb. 11 that House Bill 187 would fix an unintended gap in New Hampshire law that currently prevents parents from obtaining restraining orders on behalf of minors against people who are not members of the child’s household or family. He described the bill as a “housekeeping” change that restores parity between adults and children in access to certain protective remedies.
Multiple witnesses, including Alanda (Alanda) Peterson — author of “Jade’s Law” — and Tracy Searls, who described an instance where a judge denied a parent’s request to obtain a restraining order on behalf of a child abused by a nonhousehold individual, urged passage. Searls said the clerk told her the child would have to file for protection personally, even though the child was a young minor and lacked capacity to navigate the process.
Supporters argued the bill closes an unintended exclusion that leaves minors without the same protections available to adults. Several committee members urged that the change belong in the civil restraining-order statutes but accepted the sponsor’s pragmatic explanation that the fix fits the existing statutory structure and can be refined later.
The committee moved the bill into executive session and then voted on a motion of “ought to pass” (OTP), moved by Representative Levesque and seconded by Representative Rice. Committee clerk roll call recorded 14 yes votes and no no votes; the measure passed 14–0 and was reported out of committee to the next stage.
Representative Love suggested an amendment to change the effective date to “immediately upon signing”; the committee discussed technical edits and placement of the language in statute for future cleanup.
The bill drew personal testimony from multiple people who said the law’s current text prevented them from obtaining protective relief for minors abused by nonhousehold members and from advocates who recalled the law’s original intent. The committee’s vote moves the proposal to the next legislative step with unanimous committee support.
